It made me ponder on some of the numbers. The repos for FHIR is very high (comparatively) but I suspect this is strongly skewed by repos that are FHIR implementation guides vs. those that are code.
Other than a few minor Android apps, I’m not proficient in Java - my language of choice is C#
Are other budding C# developers just itching to get involved in some open-source openEHR?
I have just started refactoring one of my projects, and this is calling out for a C# version of the AOM. It’s going to be a slog, but I have started on that journey.
I’ll make the repo public once I get the first classes and unit tests in place; contributors and committers would be most welcome.
It is. However, this could also be an effect of which tools are preferred in each of the communities. I’ve taken part in projects where the FHIR stuff uses Git for tasks where we would use Confluence and/or the CKM.
For example, in Q1 2025 53 unique people submitted a total of 148 archetype reviews on the international CKM.
That is a very good point Sijle. I wonder if the various Github openehr-knowledge-resource repos were recognised as software?
It is an interesting paper, and I think we could and should do more to support independent software developers.
I was in conversation recently with a developer who is doing something interesting re openEHR and FHIR which is intended to be open-sourced, but he really wanted to find a way to make this effort more collaborative/sustainable etc @borut.jures and others will recognise the challenge.
Right now the openEHR software program is a bit dormant but as/when this is revived, it feels like it might be worth having as part of its remit, to allow shared discussion of ‘business’ models’ . By that I don’t just mean commercialisation but more broadly how to sustain/grow projects e.g wider collaboration/ premium services/ sponsorship.
And part of that could really be facilitated by some core libraries in different languages such as Richards proposal, Archie etc.
